Unisex changing rooms put women in danger

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Every time I walk through an empty parking garage, or alone on a walking trail, I risk being assaulted by a male predator.

Shouldn’t we ban men from parking garages and walking trails, to make me feel safe?

Trans people are not the problem here. Male predators are.

I wonder how much that risk would go up if you were naked?

Naked has nothing to do with it.

Most rapes occur in isolated areas – such as lonely stairwells, elevators, laundromats, bus or train stops, biking or jogging trails. A victim’s home also provides seclusion for a rapist during a burglary or invasion.

www.crime-safety-security.com...

so being naked has nothing to do with these guys seeking out these unisex changing rooms?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

Humans will be human...how do you change 2 million years of sexual urges by a few 100 years of slow control. I think human behavior will win in the end...Might not be pretty though, but then humans are not a very nice animal, you don't become top of the food chain by being nice.

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Every time I walk through an empty parking garage, or alone on a walking trail, I risk being assaulted by a male predator.

Shouldn’t we ban men from parking garages and walking trails, to make me feel safe?

Trans people are not the problem here. Male predators are.

I wonder how much that risk would go up if you were naked?

Naked has nothing to do with it.

Most rapes occur in isolated areas – such as lonely stairwells, elevators, laundromats, bus or train stops, biking or jogging trails. A victim’s home also provides seclusion for a rapist during a burglary or invasion.

www.crime-safety-security.com...

so being naked has nothing to do with these guys seeking out these unisex changing rooms?

No. Predators are opportunistic. They look for isolated areas where they won’t be seen or caught. The more isolated, the better the opportunity. They’ll go for a woman in a bulky turtleneck sweater and skirt down to the floor — as long as she’s in an isolated area.

a reply to: kaylaluv

No. Predators are opportunistic.

So predators who are opportunistic, wont take the opportunity a unisex changing room provides to them? Seems like the perfect opportunity to me.

You do realize the mental gymnastics youre doing here to justify it as harmless, dont you?

The predators have been around since the dawn of time. Getting rid of unisex changing/restrooms will not eliminate the problem. Knowing and teaching about being aware of ones surroundings will help. Also knowing how to defend yourself is a good idea.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
The predators have been around since the dawn of time. Getting rid of unisex changing/restrooms will not eliminate the problem. Knowing and teaching about being aware of ones surroundings will help. Also knowing how to defend yourself is a good idea.

Eliminating an additional opportunity for them to target people most certainly will help.

Thats like saying locking your doors at night isnt needed because there have been criminals through out history.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

A few things.

1. There are 1822 Target stores in the US.

2. The data comes from, "Using Target stores as a case study, we analyzed 220 media-reported sexual offenses in Target stores from 2003 to August of 2017."

So what they did was search Google (it says it further in) using a variety of search terms. This is extremely poor methodology.

A. Ever try searching old news articles? A combination of factors will make searches of pretty much anything return fewer and fewer results the older the date. Some factors to consider:

- The number of news outlets with online archives in 2003 vs 2017. The volume of archived news reports I'm sure has raised year over year every year since the advent of public Internet access.

- Outlets retain online archives of differing lengths.

- Many of them have paid archives for articles older than a certain (recent) date.

- Consolidation of media outlets has caused a number of independently operated sites to be eliminated. For instance our local newspaper had it's own website until it was bought up by Advance Digital, now its articles are part of a templated local news hub and the did only have archives of articles since the switch.

B. Reporting is not directly proportionate to incidence.

- Not every incident is reported by the news. Now they do mention searching for police blotters but what percentage of the incidents come from blotters? Why not identify a large sample of published police blotters and then search them in their entirety?

- For various reasons, it can be desirable to focus more reporting on a given topic, particularly one that is a political hot button. This is especially true of national news. Lots of things never make it out of the local level and less from the state level.

There's a finite reporting capacity and a finite amount of consumption by news consumers. This naturally results in prioritization. The upshot is when editors and reporters want to draw attention to something or give the impression of a trend, they'll scour their own sources far more rigorously for incidents.

The whole thing is rather slipshod. To their credit, they do dedicate some space to mentioning some of these limitations (including "recent bias," political bias and "media loss"). They also do not appear to be following specific incidents through the legal system. How many of these resulted in prosecution? Conviction? How many of the incidents were perpetrated by the same individual?

You also have to take into account other factors like whether or not there is increased reporting of incidents. Consider a similar analysis of news stories about work-related sexual assaults and harassment. How many more incidents would you count post-#metoo compared to pre-#metoo? Would that indicate an increase in the incidence?

Then there are yet other factors like the increase in smart phone usage which I'm guessing correlates to increases in both "peeping tom" and "upskirt" incidents.

Setting all that aside, the raw number of counted incidents is extremely low. There were 1818 Target stores in the US in 2017 according to the paper. (side note, they also do mention that the number of Target stores has increased each year. There were 1682 in 2008. So about an 8% increase in Targets in the time frame.)

Most of the categories show no discernible trend (as the paper states, "virtually unchanged") with the exception of the two voyeurism related categories ("peeping tom" and "upskirt"). Here's the crux of this would be panic-inducing "study" :

There was an average of 7 upskirt incidents per year in the years 2011-2015, but this jumped to 16 in 2016, and 14 already in 2017 up until August. Peeping tom incidents also showed a significant rise, from 4 and 5 in 2012 and 2013 respectively, to an average of 9 in 2014-2015, then jumping to 19 in 2016 and 18 up until Aug, 2017. Indecent exposures rose from an average of 3.6 in the years 2010-2014, rising to 7 in 2015, 9 in 2016, and a pro-rated 13.5 in 2017.

The raw totals are extremely low. The policy change occurred in April of 2016. What explains the increases prior to the policy? Why did "peeping tom" incidents basically double 2014-2015 vs 2012-2013?

With such low incidence, it's particularly prone to error due to all the aforementioned limitations.

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
The predators have been around since the dawn of time. Getting rid of unisex changing/restrooms will not eliminate the problem. Knowing and teaching about being aware of ones surroundings will help. Also knowing how to defend yourself is a good idea.

Eliminating an additional opportunity for them to target people most certainly will help.

Thats like saying locking your doors at night isnt needed because there have been criminals through out history.

Alright I can see the logic. White flag raised.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

LIES!

Desperate, perverted sexual deviant males would never do anything inappropriate in a rest room. First things first they need to make all the restrooms at rest areas unisex. FFS!

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered
a reply to: kaylaluv

No. Predators are opportunistic.

So predators who are opportunistic, wont take the opportunity a unisex changing room provides to them? Seems like the perfect opportunity to me.

Only if there’s no one else around. Same with parking garages, elevators, and jogging trails.
So, ban men in parking garages, elevators and jogging trails - and you will eliminate many, many assaults by male predators.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Well, I had culture shock the first time I took a bus to the nearest city and went to a swimming pool at the age of 14 and was faced with a unisex changing facility, that was around 1991. That particular pool has been demolished and another pool built in another location in the city with the same name and unisex changing facilities. I'm guessing it's not a huge issue over here. I daresay if I went and googled I'd find stories of sexual harassment in pools in the UK but there are reports of sexual harassment in most places, doesn't make it right but, here in the UK, just about every pool is unisex change, at least the newer one, and I don't see the harm.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered
a reply to: kaylaluv

No. Predators are opportunistic.

So predators who are opportunistic, wont take the opportunity a unisex changing room provides to them? Seems like the perfect opportunity to me.

So, ban men

I took the liberty of editing your quote down so I could get this, a quote that would stop about 85% of sexual harassment.

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered
a reply to: kaylaluv

No. Predators are opportunistic.

So predators who are opportunistic, wont take the opportunity a unisex changing room provides to them? Seems like the perfect opportunity to me.

So, ban men

I took the liberty of editing your quote down so I could get this, a quote that would stop about 85% of sexual harassment.

I suspect sexual harassment is not the true concern in this thread. The true concern is that trans people are icky, and are getting too uppity.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Fair enough. Went for a bike ride downtown after nightfall with my wifey last night. At one point, we passed a probable homeless man wearing a literal Jason hockey mask on a bridge whom just stared at us as we went by.

I found it humorous, while my SO was terrified and talked about it all night and day since then. Again fair enough, should could have been assaulted if alone, but I would have killed the man.

I can see it from her side and yours. There are #y people out there and unisex bathrooms are unnecessary. We are born male or female. Legitimate people who identify otherwise can and should simply use the bathroom lf their choosing and likely nobody would even bat an eye or question it. Plenty of guys appear as girls and vice versa nowadays anyways.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Unisex changing rooms put women in danger - The planners and movers behind all this stuff knew that fact even before they even began to roll the ball.

The question is; what is their objective in all this? What is the outcome they want that requires they put women at risk of sexual and other assualt?

Is all this aimed at females or is it aimed at males or both?

Again' how will the landscape appear compared to what it was before they started?

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Whatthedoctorordered
a reply to: kaylaluv

No. Predators are opportunistic.

So predators who are opportunistic, wont take the opportunity a unisex changing room provides to them? Seems like the perfect opportunity to me.

So, ban men

I took the liberty of editing your quote down so I could get this, a quote that would stop about 85% of sexual harassment.

I suspect sexual harassment is not the true concern in this thread. The true concern is that trans people are icky, and are getting too uppity.

Here the trans effect has only exploded in the past few years. Being involved in the fetish scene for the past 24 years means I've known Trans folk for many years before this explosion, I can safely say that trans people getting uppity had nothing to do with the introduction of unisex changing facilities in swimming pools. Convenience probably had more to do with it, or the fact that if a little Girl [Boy] goes swimming with their Daddy [Mummy] they're not going into the opposite changing room, they all go into the same.

To say this came about "because trans" is daft (not meaning you kaylaluv)

Judging by the pearl-clutching here, I should have been raped a dozen times over by now, considering all the unisex crappers and public pool changing rooms I've been in throughout my life, most of them SOLO even as a kid, OMG! Why was I not at least molested like everyone swears should happen!?

Very s#ty methodology based on Google searches with no controls does not a trend make.

sports causes blood circulation to flow faster. i am not supporting unisex changing rooms. changing rooms should be private and personal. like cabinets.

a reply to: kaylaluv

because they are using the energy they gathered in unisex change rooms.

a reply to: Nyiah

noone said molesters didnt have a taste.duh.